Who is, in your opinion, the world's worst reputable composer?

If anybody however, starts to imply that John Cage is superior to Rimsky Korsakov for example, then they will have another thing coming!

What does "superior" mean? If I had to choose, I probably listen to Cage's prepared piano pieces over most of Korsakov's music (Romantic period? bleh). They both had great strengths. The question is, who are YOU superior to?

Almacq, honestly, I think you should spend more time writing and less time posturing. You could learn a lot from the people you so vehemently bash for no real good reason. Robin said most of what I've already wanted to say. Have a good night.

As far as I understand it, if a composer is reputable...

He or she is, in all likelihood, a good composer. Yes, you may not like the music, but that by no stretch of the imagination means it's bad. Reputations are earned for a reason.

What does "superior" mean? If I had to choose, I probably listen to Cage's prepared piano pieces over most of Korsakov's music (Romantic period? bleh). They both had great strengths. The question is, who are YOU superior to?

Almacq, honestly, I think you should spend more time writing and less time posturing. You could learn a lot from the people you so vehemently bash for no real good reason. Robin said most of what I've already wanted to say. Have a good night.

I'm so sick of everyone denying terms and definitions. Why does everyone have to pretend that they don't understand or can't possibly accept the terms "superior," "better," or, as it sometimes comes down to "music." When Almacq said that he is not superior to Rimsky Korsakov, you know exactly what he means, and you probably also know exactly why he says that. So why do you have to challenge his use of the word "superior?" We understand that it's an opinion - he never said it wasn't an opinion. So instead of saying "What does "superior" mean?" why not just say, "I disagree?"

I'm so sick of everyone denying terms and definitions. Why does everyone have to pretend that they don't understand or can't possibly accept the terms "superior," "better," or, as it sometimes comes down to "music." When Almacq said that he is not superior to Rimsky Korsakov, you know exactly what he means, and you probably also know exactly why he says that. So why do you have to challenge his use of the word "superior?" We understand that it's an opinion - he never said it wasn't an opinion. So instead of saying "What does "superior" mean?" why not just say, "I disagree?"

"That depends on what you mean by the word is"

You can get sick until you're blue in the face, the point is that he and no one else has any right to make such rash statements. Honestly, who is he to say that? "You're gonna get if you say ____ is superior to ____"

1) Who cares?

2) It's completely opinion

I can't reply to it with "I disagree", because he didn't form his statement in such a way. I guess I'll just have to cry crocodile tears for your "sickness" for now

"That depends on what you mean by the word is"

You can get sick until you're blue in the face, the point is that he and no one else has any right to make such rash statements. Honestly, who is he to say that? "You're gonna get if you say ____ is superior to ____"

1) Who cares?

2) It's completely opinion

I can't reply to it with "I disagree", because he didn't form his statement in such a way. I guess I'll just have to cry crocodile tears for your "sickness" for now

I don't understand any of what you just wrote. Are the things in quotation marks things someone said at some point?

I don't understand any of what you just wrote. Are the things in quotation marks things someone said at some point?

Well according to your profile you probably live somewhere in America...

I'm assuming you existed during the 90s and are aware of the Bill Clinton trial, you know, when he lied about getting a blowjob (obviously the worst thing a president can do right? Oh...) And that is one of the famous quotes, I mean aside from, "I did not have sex with that woman, Ms. Lewinsky". When he was on trial, at some point he said to the attorney, "That depends on what the meaning of the word "is" is"

Honestly, if you didn't understand anything I said in my post, well........I guess I just fear for the future of a country I was once very proud of. I guess you're why gas is $4 a gallon and people give a scraggy about Hannah gently caress Montana for some reason.

Well according to your profile you probably live somewhere in America...

I'm assuming you existed during the 90s and are aware of the Bill Clinton trial, you know, when he lied about getting a blowjob (obviously the worst thing a president can do right? Oh...) And that is one of the famous quotes, I mean aside from, "I did not have sex with that woman, Ms. Lewinsky". When he was on trial, at some point he said to the attorney, "That depends on what the meaning of the word "is" is"

Honestly, if you didn't understand anything I said in my post, well........I guess I just fear for the future of a country I was once very proud of. I guess you're why gas is $4 a gallon and people give a scraggy about Hannah gently caress Montana for some reason.

I'm 16, so I when that happened, I was too young to know who was giving or receiving blowjobs, and what they said about them. I don't know how that means I'm responsible for $4/gallon gas, but...i assure you that I am now too old to listen to Hannah Montana (if you CAN be too old to love Hannah Montana!!!! )

The problem with your post was that your response said "Who cares?" I care, that's why I posted. If other people don't care, they don't have to read or respond. And obviously you do care, because you continued to respond with "It's all opinion," which really doesn't address my argument in any specific way...I have no idea what you are referencing. Besides, even if something is an opinion, you can still respond to it by saying "I disagree." And yes, you could have just said "I disagree," even though he didn't explicitly ask in his post "does anyone disagree?" I don't know how he could have phrased his opinion so that it ALLOWED you to say "I disagree" any more than it already did.

I don't know how he could have phrased his opinion so that it ALLOWED you to say "I disagree" any more than it already did.

Well I guess that's your problem, isn't it?

I'm not in the business of debating semantics, your argument bores me.

Hey, I have an idea! Let's pointlessly argue semantics and go completely astray from the topic of the thread! This would be fun-buns!

might as well, YC members are notorious for it :thumbsdown:

For god's sake, people, quit preaching about how "bad" historically affirmed composers are. Like I said before, it's ridiculous to argue that any composer whose music has garnered any good reputation at all is a "bad" composer. Except maybe Dussek.

For god's sake, people, quit preaching about how "bad" historically affirmed composers are. Like I said before, it's ridiculous to argue that any composer whose music has garnered any reputation at all is a "bad" composer. Except maybe Dussek.

People on this thread are just hoping that through bashing one composer, they might be able to say they are better than them.

"Philip Glass is the worst _____, therefore I am better than him, listen to my music that tries to sound like Mozart or Bach with 2 minutes training of counterpoint"

I'm adding John Williams to the list. One of the worst cases of plagerism I've ever scene.

(Just as an excercise, take the Star Wars film scores and some Mahler Symphonys and Holst's Planets in shuffle mode. Don't look at the iPod and try to figure out who wrote what. You'd be surprised what you come up with.

I'm adding John Williams to the list. One of the worst cases of plagerism I've ever scene.

(Just as an excercise, take the Star Wars film scores and some Mahler Symphonys and Holst's Planets in shuffle mode. Don't look at the iPod and try to figure out who wrote what. You'd be surprised what you come up with.

Oh please, everyone steals. You steal, I steal, everyone steals. Christ, there's a part in Star Wars, I believe at the beginning of Return of the Jedi that sounds just like the Mystic Circle of Dancers or whatever from the 2nd act of Rite of Spring. That same section is BLATANTLY stolen from Nuages (Debussy) from Stravinsky. Igor did quite a bit of this as we all know, and we still love him. The point is, John Williams is a great composer, a DAMN good film composer and has done much more creative things and seen more success for his creativity than probably any internet schmuck with an opinion ever will.

It's funny, I bet if John Williams, or John Cage or whoever else walked into your room right now you'd all be kissing their asses. Either that, or you'd actually have the audacity of throwing your own scores at them and saying, "gently caress you Cage/Williams/etc, my music's better than yours", then they'd just beat you with their Grammys' and Pulitzers....

It must be Cage, Glass. Beethoven sometimes lack true inspiration. If we want to be less severe, some of his melody's suck.

It must be Cage, Glass. Beethoven sometimes lack true inspiration. If we want to be less severe, some of his melody's suck.

Yes, I'm sure you could teach Beethoven what music's really about....

By the way, I need to correct your grammar spelling. It's "melodies", "melody's" is a possessive noun, implying that the melody physically has a suck....

Moonwoman is craaazy, that's some sass ther sister. Etc Etc.

The Clinton thing, haha oh wow. I remember that and I've got nothing to do with the USA at all what so ever, but it was still loltastic. Also? Everyone who is new/won't read the 10 previous pages is going to drop by and say "lol (A MODERN COMPOSER) sucks, they don't write music I enjoy, therefore it's not even music. Or art. Or scraggy."

It's been happening for the last 10 pages though some people apparently hate non-modern things too, I'm still thinking this has to be the biggest idiot-trap thread ever at this rate. Just leave it to the interwebs and hilarity ensues.

The thing with Cage is borderline stupid at this point in the narrative, come on. The person is a historical figure, he's recognized by countless musicologists, BLAH BLAH BLAH, truth is it don't matter at all what anyone thinks of what he did, it's done and it's important. It's like trying to say what Napoleon did was not noteworthy, and we should as well forget about him, or any other given historical figure.

Lest anyone wants Robin here posting even more youtube videos and beating people up, I'd rather the hatin' stopped. I'm sad to suggest it, but someone should lock the thread before even more people have the chance to completely make a fool out of themselves and more gratuitous hating' goes on for no reason.

It's been happening for the last 10 pages though some people apparently hate non-modern things too, I'm still thinking this has to be the biggest idiot-trap thread ever at this rate. Just leave it to the interwebs and hilarity ensues.

Actually I think this thread is interesting and shouldn't be stopped, simply because a few people voiced their opinions.

Personally, the fact that modern composers with newer ideas still cannot outshine composers who wrote music 200 to 100 in a popularity contest, even amongst composers, is very telling.

As for Williams stealing, rather than writing him off because a few bars of his work sound like the end of Mars, you'd do better to actually listen to his work. The Star Wars soundtracks are possibly the best films soundtracks ever scored (although I'm sure there are some equally amazing scores from bygone eras). Of course it's influenced by other works... isn't every single piece ever written except the first piece of music ever?

Lest anyone wants Robin here posting even more youtube videos and beating people up, I'd rather the hatin' stopped.

Personally, the fact that modern composers with newer ideas still cannot outshine composers who wrote music 200 to 100 in a popularity contest, even amongst composers, is very telling.

It'd be very telling if it was:

A: A fact.

B: Not a matter of taste.

Plus, blah blah, semantics, "outshine" blah blah means nothing. Stockhausen outshines the gently caress out of Bach in complexity and elaboration in my opinion (Kontate, Klavierst

haha! No I'm not going to claim any objectivity! That would be like one of those polls in the news, where they claim that 80% of the country favour this politician based on a polling of 100 random people!

I'm adding John Williams to the list. One of the worst cases of plagerism I've ever scene.

(Just as an excercise, take the Star Wars film scores and some Mahler Symphonys and Holst's Planets in shuffle mode. Don't look at the iPod and try to figure out who wrote what. You'd be surprised what you come up with.

Doesn't that make Holst and Mahler suck, too?

Brahms!!! Definately Brahms! There are billions of composers I haven't heard yet, but Brahms is the only one that makes me fall asleep. If I were a Furby, I'd say: "Booooring!". I'm not a Furby but I still say "Booooring!" to Brahms...

First off, I'm not even going to touch whatever MoonWoman said. She/he/it (it's a painting!) is not worth it.

As for Williams stealing, rather than writing him off because a few bars of his work sound like the end of Mars, you'd do better to actually listen to his work. The Star Wars soundtracks are possibly the best films soundtracks ever scored (although I'm sure there are some equally amazing scores from bygone eras). Of course it's influenced by other works... isn't every single piece ever written except the first piece of music ever?

I do agree with the last statement. There is no such thing as "first ever." It always came out of something before it.

Disclaimer: THIS IS AN OPINION!!!

I have listened to his score, almost the entire score from the Star Wars series. I write him off because he is ridiculiously unoriginal. Everything he writes was written before. Personally, the scores of Hermann and Alfred Newman are much richer and have more depth than Williams. Even Miklos Roszca (sp?) did more interesting stuff. A good composer takes something else and reworks it to make it sound new and fresh even though it may be the same thing, just in a different lens. Williams did not do this. He just copied the score from Mars, put it in 4/4 and got his check in the mail. Lucas should just have bought a CD of the LSO playing the Planets and used that. He would have saved a heck of a lot of money and 98% of movie-goers wouldn't have known the difference.

Doesn't that make Holst and Mahler suck, too?

No. As said above, Williams was not original.

Brahms!!! Definately Brahms! There are billions of composers I haven't heard yet, but Brahms is the only one that makes me fall asleep. If I were a Furby, I'd say: "Booooring!". I'm not a Furby but I still say "Booooring!" to Brahms...

Totally agree!!!!! I get really anoyed by all those music afficionadoes that consistantly push for the three "B"s of music: Bach, Beethoven, and Brahms. He has some terrific stuff, but it lasts for 8 bars and then dies away lingering for 15 minutes. Shame. Mahler did the same, but came to life instead of dying away. (Cite any Adagio Mahler wrote.)